Why would anyone think it was a good idea? The whole advantage of non-live-action is that your characters are built from the ground up, they can look exactly like their creator envisioned. They aren't just another actor playing a different role, but the character at its purest.But, yeah fuck that, let's constrain ourselves by reusing the same character models.
I think it's too early still to have digital actors completely replacing live actors.
>>667356CGI Actors? You mean real people that act for cgi roles? Or a CG character built by a company to play in different roles and movies? If the first, they still do that and it's pretty popular. The second seems pretty retarded.
Wait, what the fuck are you on about? Do you mean scanned actors, or purely CGI characters being redressed for different purposes? I've never heard of the latter before.
>>667356Square want using sucessful videogames in movie industry just massive fail.Maybe in 30 to 50 years digital actors becomes normal.
>>667364>>667361The second one, hence the picture of Aki Ross from The Spirits Within.
>>667356For 'The Spirits Within' it was all about the novelty of seeing characters like that realized. To me as an interested 3D artist watching that film at the time was much like watching a video game from the futurea pretty shit movie that served as a cool tech-demo. It wasn't a box office success either.Having CGI actors, no matter if they look like the real actor or not, has it's own advantages tho. You can do stuff like place that digital actor into any situation without risking life or limb and let any stunt/martial-arts talent move it's body etc.What you are talking about will probably become a thing further into the future within our life-times.It's already starting to happen in videogames where voice actors that looks nothing like the roles they portray start gaining recognition.The west in ~10 years from now might have voice actors start reaching similar levels of stardom they can have in present Japan.We already have some seriously memorable cinematic works where what you describe is already a thing, Metal Gear, Mass Effect, Last of Us, Witcher to name a few.
>>667395Uh, what the hell are you talking about? OP's disconnecting voice actors from these CGI characters completely. He's talking about reusing models as different characters in different franchises. It's like seeing TLUS' Joel's model play Snake in the next MGS title, or having a Mass Effect remake with a bald Geralt playing Commander Shepard, to use the games you cited. It has nothing to do with voice actors. Anyway, the west celebrates voice actors quite a bit too, y'know? Nolan North, Troy Baker, massive personalities that are pretty much only known for their roles in cartoons and games.
>>667396acronym machine broke, obviously meant TLOU not TLUS.
>>667396>He's talking about reusing models as different characters in different franchises.When has that ever happened?
>>667397They should make a 'The Last US', it's like Fallout but instead of a radioactive desert it takes place in paradise Hawaii after the ruskies forgot to nuke it in WW III.
>>667399It hasn't as far as I know, but they planned it with the character in the OP image if Wikipedia serves me well. The movie flopped so they scratched the idea. But the concept sounds shit either way.
>>667399I actually came up with one instance where this has kinda happened. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiko_NagaseNot familiar with what's going on in japan with these 'virtual idols', but remember playing Ace Combat and noticing the Ridge Racer girl was my wingman.
OP sounds like a clueless Zoomer. Lurk moar.
>>667418Holy shit, you and all the other children in this thread make me really feel ancient.Square had big plans to reuse their female protagonist character from Spirits Within for several films. Their idea was, "Let's create a fully CG photorealistic actor to use in different movies! It'll be awesome! She'll be so detailed she look completely real!"It was a stupid idea, not just because of the obvious problem of technology outpacing itself and any character they created would look dated as fuck after only a few years; there was also the issue other anons have already pointed out: the whole point of using CG and/or animation is to create fully custom characters for each film. Why would you deliberately reuse a character in an unrelated franchise?It was this big push to start generating artificial personas, people that weren't really people, but publicly were treated like real. The Gorillaz and Miku Hastune are examples of this successfully put into practice, with them performing "live" concerts, but with their appearance being continually updated as technology and tastes change to keep them relevant.Aki was Square's attempt to create a "virtual actress", and it was a moronic idea. They even tried to keep her relevant by getting her into Maxim.
>>667630I'm probably older than you.
>>667630I dunno, it'd be kinda neat if there was a canonical backing, multiverse type shit that was subtly hinted at with an arc, lot of potential for the writers to fuck that up.It'd also be a neat benchmark for the industry, looking at the various methods used as they updated the mesh with more contemporary modalities.
>>667630I think the concept was just too ambitious for its time. While still pretty stupid, because like already said the point of digital media is to have the freedom to create anything that looks like anything, it might have worked if it was pitched maybe a few years from now.The pictures posted so far of Aki Ross just don't look photorealistic. She's very clearly CG, incredibly Daz-like even. That could have contributed to her flop. It's only a matter of time before we breach the uncanny valley and create fully photorealistic animated humans. I wouldn't be surprised if this came with entirely digital actors that look like real people but simply don't exist in reality. (In fact, it might just cycle back to uncanny. Knowing that this seemingly very real face belongs to someone that isn't real.)They'd likely blend in quite well, you really only see big stars on the big screen, what difference does it make if you only see this CG actor on the big screen? You'd just never hear of interviews or personal life from them, which given how some actors already seclude their off-screen lives could very easily make this a non-issue.The only issue would be voice talent, but given the rapid development of voice synthesis tech, these purely digital actors could easily get purely digital voices too. Actually, I think I now see why Square wanted to try something like this.>the whole point of using CG and/or animation is to create fully custom characters for each film. Why would you deliberately reuse a character in an unrelated franchise? Because you're forgetting the appeal of actors. It's not just how good-looking an actor is, it's also how distinct their face is. It's memorable, recognisable. Compare that to a fresh face in every new bit of cinema, there's no appeal and no draw, you're taking a risk every time with a face that your audience doesn't recognise. There's a reason why big name actors draw in hundreds of millions for every film they do.The future, man.
ITT whiny faggots
>>667356Well I actually like it. Now, characters in capcom games don't look like shonen characters anymore.
>>667665>Because you're forgetting the appeal of actors.So, how come 3D hentais made by the same studios do not do it? Even in 2D ero-animes, it's very rare (the only example I know, being the pic related).
>>667689All anime characters look the same. Your point is moot.
>>667356They did it on a level/scale and with technical proficiency that was unheard of at the time. Pushing the envelope. All while Poser/DAZlets 20 years later push absolutely nothing.